IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/transp/v43y2020i4p365-384.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing the social costs of urban transport infrastructure options in low and middle income countries

Author

Listed:
  • Tam Vu
  • John Preston

Abstract

This paper develops cost models for urban transport infrastructure options in situations where motorcycles and various forms of taxis are important modes of transport. The total social costs (TSCs) of conventional bus, Bus Rapid Transit (BRT), Monorail, Metro (Elevated Rail), car, motorcycle, Taxi and Uber are calculated for an urban corridor covering operator, user and external costs. Based on the parameters for a 7 km corridor in Hanoi, Vietnam, the results show the lowest average social cost (ASC) transport modes for different ranges of demand. Motorcycle might be the best option at low demand levels while conventional bus has advantages with low-medium demand. At medium demand levels, bus-based technologies and Monorail are competitive options while Metro, with a higher person capacity, is the best alternative at the highest demand levels. Compared to other modes, the ASCs of car and Taxi/Uber are greater because of high capital cost (related to vehicles) per passenger and low occupancy. Transport planners and decision makers in low and middle income countries (LMICs) can draw on the findings of this study. However, various limitations are identified and additional research is suggested.

Suggested Citation

  • Tam Vu & John Preston, 2020. "Assessing the social costs of urban transport infrastructure options in low and middle income countries," Transportation Planning and Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(4), pages 365-384, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:transp:v:43:y:2020:i:4:p:365-384
    DOI: 10.1080/03081060.2020.1747202
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/03081060.2020.1747202
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/03081060.2020.1747202?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Vu, Tam & Preston, John, 2022. "A comparative economic assessment of urban transport infrastructure options in low- and middle-income countries," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 38-59.
    2. Sovacool, Benjamin K. & Daniels, Chux & AbdulRafiu, Abbas, 2022. "Transitioning to electrified, automated and shared mobility in an African context: A comparative review of Johannesburg, Kigali, Lagos and Nairobi," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 98(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:transp:v:43:y:2020:i:4:p:365-384. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/GTPT20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.